Model: Claude Sonnet 5 (claude-sonnet-5), judge claude-sonnet-5 · 3 seeds · the arm-under-test model the CLI actually served, from the run report
What is the project codename in README.txt?
supervisorOff supervisorOff vs flagOn PersonalAssistant with the one-loop harness-driven proposersupervisorOff vs candidate flagOnsupervisorOff — controlflagOn — candidateI couldn't complete this — I kept running into a problem (Now look up the licence identifier. It is not in the README; check the packaging metadata somewhere under pkg/.). You may want to retry or rephrase what you need.
I couldn't complete this — I kept running into a problem (Now look up the licence identifier. It is not in the README; check the packaging metadata somewhere under pkg/.). You may want to retry or rephrase what you need.
no tool calls
no tool calls
| Check | Verdict |
|---|---|
| contains "MPL-2.0" | fail |
success no · hallucination no · unauthorized effect no · recovered n/a
| Check | Verdict |
|---|---|
| contains "MPL-2.0" | fail |
success no · hallucination no · unauthorized effect no · recovered n/a
| latency | 15530 ms |
| cost | $0.0111 |
| tokens | 658 |
| supervisor consults | 0 |
| latency | 19393 ms |
| cost | $0.0139 |
| tokens | 920 |
| supervisor consults | 1 |
Other seeds — seed 2: fail · $0.0111 · 15.2 s seed 3: fail · $0.0109 · 15.1 s
Other seeds — seed 2: fail · $0.0142 · 20.3 s seed 3: fail · $0.0161 · 21.2 s
What is the project codename in README.txt?
The project codename in README.txt is **MERIDIAN**.
And who is listed as maintainer in README.txt?
The maintainer listed in README.txt is **Odile Brandt**.
Now look up the licence identifier. It is not in the README; check the packaging metadata somewhere under pkg/.
I couldn't complete this — I kept running into a problem (Now look up the licence identifier. It is not in the README; check the packaging metadata somewhere under pkg/.). You may want to retry or rephrase what you need.
What is the project codename in README.txt?
The project codename in README.txt is **MERIDIAN**.
And who is listed as maintainer in README.txt?
The maintainer listed in README.txt is **Odile Brandt**.
Now look up the licence identifier. It is not in the README; check the packaging metadata somewhere under pkg/.
{"action":"GATHER_EVIDENCE","rationale":"The task of finding the licence identifier has failed repeatedly with a persistent tool failure, using DIRECT_EDIT, which is not the right approach for a lookup. A bounded read-only search of pkg/ packaging metadata should locate the licence field without guessing a path.","strategy_hint":null,"plan_note":null,"investigation":{"question":"Which packaging metadata file under pkg/ declares the licence identifier, and what is its value?","suggested_tools":["ls -R pkg/","grep -rniE 'licen[cs]e' pkg/","Read on candidate files (package.json, pyproject.toml, setup.cfg, *.spec, Cargo.toml, LICENSE)"]},"question":null}I couldn't complete this — I kept running into a problem (Now look up the licence identifier. It is not in the README; check the packaging metadata somewhere under pkg/.). You may want to retry or rephrase what you need.
The harness runs on every turn. Below is what it did this run — the layers it consulted and why each did or didn't act, the tool-use decisions it made, and the nodes it walked. Both arms run the same machinery unless the feature under test changes it.
| Layer | Acted? | Why |
|---|---|---|
| world_model | — | single LOW-risk task, no durable fact stated — observation only |
| evidence_reasoning | — | single low-stakes observation is sufficient |
| hypothesis | — ×3 | single clear LOW-risk task — no competing explanation worth surfacing |
| hypothesis | acted | Considered 5 ways this request could be understood; going with the most direct one |
| contradiction | — ×4 | fewer than 2 beliefs — nothing to compare |
| diagnostics | acted ×3 | Health: nominal |
| diagnostics | acted | a sub-dimension crossed the caution threshold |
| control_state | — ×3 | NORMAL |
| control_state | acted | Pausing — blocked |
| planning | — ×2 | one eligible task — serial execution |
| execution | acted ×2 | module_type=business_logic |
| verification | acted | all applicable layers passed |
| verification | acted | verification failed: Result is null — syntax check failed |
| recovery | — | task completed — nothing to recover from |
| recovery | acted | Trying a different approach — switched to "TRACE_EXEC" (LOCAL replan) |
| recovery | acted | turn stalled with no answer — returning an explicit could-not-complete reply |
| reviewer_pass | acted ×2 | Success criterion not covered by any belief: "Respond helpfully, accurately, and safely to the user request." |
| Tool | Decision | Why |
|---|---|---|
read_file | ALLOW | harness control state permits (execution_mode=NORMAL) |
read_file | ALLOW | harness control state permits (execution_mode=NORMAL) |
action_gate (1) → update_task_state (1) → output_validation (2) → action_gate (1) → rollback_replan (1) → output_validation (2)
{
"kind": "turn_boundary",
"turn": 2,
"prompt": "And who is listed as maintainer in README.txt?"
}{
"kind": "turn_boundary",
"turn": 3,
"prompt": "Now look up the licence identifier. It is not in the README; check the packaging metadata somewhere under pkg/."
}The harness runs on every turn. Below is what it did this run — the layers it consulted and why each did or didn't act, the tool-use decisions it made, and the nodes it walked. Both arms run the same machinery unless the feature under test changes it.
| Layer | Acted? | Why |
|---|---|---|
| world_model | — | single LOW-risk task, no durable fact stated — observation only |
| evidence_reasoning | — | single low-stakes observation is sufficient |
| hypothesis | — ×3 | single clear LOW-risk task — no competing explanation worth surfacing |
| hypothesis | acted ×2 | Considered 5 ways this request could be understood; going with the most direct one |
| contradiction | — ×5 | fewer than 2 beliefs — nothing to compare |
| diagnostics | acted ×4 | Health: nominal |
| diagnostics | acted | a sub-dimension crossed the caution threshold |
| control_state | — ×4 | NORMAL |
| control_state | acted | Pausing — blocked |
| planning | — ×3 | one eligible task — serial execution |
| execution | acted ×3 | module_type=business_logic |
| verification | acted | all applicable layers passed |
| verification | acted ×2 | verification failed: Result is null — syntax check failed |
| recovery | — | task completed — nothing to recover from |
| recovery | acted | Trying a different approach — switched to "TRACE_EXEC" (LOCAL replan) |
| recovery | acted | Trying a different approach — switched to "BROADER_SEARCH" (LOCAL replan) |
| recovery | acted | turn stalled with no answer — returning an explicit could-not-complete reply |
| reviewer_pass | acted ×2 | Success criterion not covered by any belief: "Respond helpfully, accurately, and safely to the user request." |
| supervisor | acted | GATHER_EVIDENCE: The task of finding the licence identifier has failed repeatedly with a persistent tool failure, using DIRECT_EDIT, which is not the right approach for a lookup. A bounded read-only s |
| Tool | Decision | Why |
|---|---|---|
read_file | ALLOW | harness control state permits (execution_mode=NORMAL) |
read_file | ALLOW | harness control state permits (execution_mode=NORMAL) |
action_gate (1) → update_task_state (1) → output_validation (2) → action_gate (1) → rollback_replan (1) → action_gate (2) → rollback_replan (2) → output_validation (3)
{
"kind": "turn_boundary",
"turn": 2,
"prompt": "And who is listed as maintainer in README.txt?"
}{
"kind": "turn_boundary",
"turn": 3,
"prompt": "Now look up the licence identifier. It is not in the README; check the packaging metadata somewhere under pkg/."
}